Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

fda.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#671

Post by rglover »

learc83 wrote: post #339
thepasswordis wrote: post #200

People don’t want to take the vaccine because others are trying to force them to. They would say “it’s not FDA approved!” not as the core of their hesitancy, but because they were trying to be appeal to pro-vax peoples decision making framework. I don’t think we should be able to require them to. To many of you here: imagine the Trump admin trying to require you to take the vaccine in November of last year. Cities wo…

Do you have any specific examples of this?: "weird, Orwellian ways that the government talks about it" Public schools, colleges, and the military have been requiring vaccines for decades. >It ends up feeling less like the decisions are guided by science and more like they’re guided by petty tyrants wanting to control what others do. This sounds like a result of reading about what health care and government officials…

The Department of Homeland Security saying "opposition to COVID measures" makes someone a "potential terror threat" is about as knee-deep in Orwellian propaganda as you can get.

NBC News: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBMCXkjaMxQ&t=778s

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#672

Post by Izkata »

hendersoon wrote: post #367
odessacubbage wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

are you overweight, elderly or otherwise immunocompromised? if not your risk of hospitalization or death [from covid19] is miniscule. >it being hard to be a part of society if you refuse to take one of the most basic steps to protect other people in it. there are a huge number of diseases you can knowingly spread with far more severe long term consequences while still being 'part of society'. frankly i do not think f…

If you're in the western world, catch COVID right now, and aren't vaccinated, even if you aren't immunocompromised, diabetic, elderly, or obese odds are your chances of dying from COVID are higher than any other disease you've caught in your life. Now it's true that chance is probably somewhere around 0.3% assuming you don't live in an area where hospitals are out of ICU beds and vents. But it's your _life_ at risk.

Is you're above 50, yes. 40-50, odds are about the same as yearly flu. Under 40, you're more at risk from the yearly flu.

(I'm going from memory and may be a little off on the age ranges, but covid is heavily weighted towards the elderly while influenza is not)

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#673

Post by nanis »

jhayward wrote: post #637
leesalminen wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t forget Vioxx!

Only someone totally ignorant of the difference between a vaccine and a pain drug, in terms of how they are tested and approved, would use 'what about vioxx' as an indictment of vaccines.

> ... as an indictment of vaccines.

Nothing here is an indictment of vaccines per se. However, it is legitimate to have concerns over a process the rules stated at the outset were thrown out, possibly for personal profit and political motivations.

Also, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28280087 for a link to an articulate consideration of a number of concerns regarding this approval.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#674

Post by dhanvanthri »

handoflixue wrote: post #645
criticaltinker wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the Pfizer vaccine works and is safe Yes the vaccine has been proven to be safe for most adults in the short-term. But blanket statements like this over-simplify the reality of the situation. People need to be aware that for certain sub-populations (eg pediatrics & pregnant women), there is insufficient scientific evidence - in terms of clinical trials and longitudinal studies - to conclude that the benefits of vac…

Just to be clear, by the standard you're proposing there's also no scientific evidence that posting on Hacker News is safe. There is no scientific evidence that the internet is safe. There is no scientific evidence that wearing a mask is safe. There is, of course, an INCREDIBLE amount of EVIDENCE for all of these things being safe (including the vaccine). There has simply never been a 100% complete full evaluation of…

Parachutes have not been subjected to rigorous evaluation by using randomized controlled trials.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/

:D

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#675

Post by xdennis »

seoaeu wrote: post #337
peakaboo wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true. There could be birth defects or lower iq in babies born from vaccinated mothers.

Those could also be long term side effects of covid . A double digit percentage of people who catch the disease end up in the hospital soon after infection compared to fraction of a fraction of a percent of vaccine recipients in the time after they get the shot. Your priors have to be absolutely outrageous if based on the currently available data you think the risks are even within an order of magnitude.

> Those could also be long term side effects of covid.

Of course, but it's a lot worse when a cure causes issues. The point of medicine is to "first, do no harm".

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#676

Post by XorNot »

freeopinion wrote: post #484
NineStarPoint wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because in cases like this, the choice they’re making with their body can be directly responsible for the hospitalization and death of other people in their vicinity. Vaccines aren’t fool proof, every person who doesn’t take the vaccine is an increased chance for those who did take the vaccine to get exposed to a breakthrough case. I know I wouldn’t want to work in person at any place that didn’t have a vaccine manda…

> I’m very much in support of it being hard to be a part of society if you refuse to take one of the most basic steps to protect other people in it Flu vaccine? Smoking cessation? Hand washing? Race/gender/religion sensitivity training? These seem like pretty basic steps. Should we bar entrance to society based on these?

You are literally not allowed to work in aged care, schools or hospitals without taking a flu vaccine every year. You also can't smoke while in the wards.

It is a firable offense to not wash your hands if you work in a restaurant.

It is a mandate at most companies to take sensitivity training.

Restaurants can reject you for not wearing covered shoes and a suitable jacket.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#677

Post by amrcnimgrnt »

Buttons840 wrote: post #488
amrcnimgrnt wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the record, I volunteered for a COVID vaccine trial. "mRNA vaccines have been tested in humans since 2011" So barely 10 years. A study on a dozen or so participants, all white, college aged men with largely identical diets. I guarantee you that not one participant in the 2011 study was pregnant. (Btw, I looked at your reference. A Bush era press release was less manipulative. There wasn't a single peer-reviewed r…

Do you believe it's possible for a sufficiently advanced society (think Star Trek) to develop a vaccine for a novel virus in a short period of time? What do you think this would look like?

Well there are a few issues with your question.

I don't think a society can be as "advanced" as Star Trek. Societies are hard. To abuse CS terminology, they're NP-hard (or harder?). Star Trek seems to have only external threats, all internal problems are solved. The most boring problem a real society has is that of production and it is definitely NP-hard (see Hayek?). Star Trek has not only solved that at galactic scales, but has solved much hard problems than production.

Nor I don't think Star Trek is advanced in the sense that I would consider it "progress" vs. just change. I view Star Trek as the propaganda reel of (not for, of) a techo-distopia. Vulkans and that Data android fellow freak me out more than the Klingons whose society, while brutal, I can understand. I see more humanity in a Klingon because I can see a human society degenerating into the Klingons'. I don't see any humanity in Vulcans.

Btw, their technology bores me. Their tech is either impossible (warp drives). Surpassed (communicators). Or fraught with angels-dancing-on-pins philosophical questions (the "beam me up scotty" machines)

So, with the caveat that you used ST as an example and I'm definitely not a Trekkie, let me address your question:

No, I don't.

Biological systems are far more complicated than any system mankind has made. Every "cure" or therapy is really a very good whack-a-mole with hopefully lots of statistical information to back it up.

Take blood. It has hundreds, if not thousands, of components. Some are in pg/dL level of concentrations (that's 10^-12g / 100ml). See this chart [1]. How can we every really understand all the interactions among those various components?

That is not to say that I'm a bio-luddite (I am, but that's besides the point). Take penecillin. It's brutal on the body, but is one of the most important discoveries in human history. It has saved millions, if not billions, of lives. Im very grateful for penicillin, and yet, what an illustrative example! We gave too much penicillin with too much abandonment. So now, we have anti-biotic resistant bacteria. And, almost 90 years after it's first discovery we're finally starting to understand it's role in the havoc in our gut flora.

Btw, gut flora is another, fascinating, example of how complicated bio-systems are. We're evolved to depend on a symbiotic relationship with a gut flora that we've destroyed over the last 70 years of anti-biotics and cheap sugar.

So, while I think ab-initio methods (what Star Trek does) can inform and accelerate drug discovery (I worked on that briefly in my PhD), ultimately, no, I don't think we can ab-initio drugs through the whole pipeline (need-->development-->safety_evals-->approval).

[1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Referenc...

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#678

Post by [deleted] »

detaro wrote: post #304
ARandomerDude wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can be hesitant of these new mRNA vaccines but for classic vaccines that use dead / weakened viruses, that doesn't make you an "anti-vaxxer". Exactly. I've had more vaccines than most people ever will because of my time in the military. I'm good with it, I think it was smart given the circumstances. The question isn't "are traditional vaccines OK?" (yes) but "do I trust other people's ability to modify my DNA w…

> do I trust other people's ability to modify my DNA without error? There is no vaccine that's based on people's ability to modify your DNA, so no need to worry about that. (I wonder how the idea that they do still keeps floating around...)

[deleted]

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#679

Post by [deleted] »

felipellrocha wrote: post #55
acdha wrote: post #6

I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. I think a huge factor will be how many employers, colleges, etc. are now willing and legally able to require vaccination. It’s one thing to say you trust something you read on Facebook more than your doctor and quite another to walk away from a job because of it.

Huge odds. People were anti-vaxxers before, and were just looking for an excuse to justify their position. Goal post moving is a thing to be expected nowadays

[deleted]

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#680

Post by mattigames »

pgalvin wrote: post #558
jboggan wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It has been clear for a while now that the Pfizer vaccine works and is safe." Yes, except there is an established process for quantifying "clear for a while now" and it involves sufficient time and control groups. That process isn't being followed and it is concerning for a number of reasons, including the effect of political pressure on expedited drug approvals in the future now that this precedent is being set. Th…

This really, really is not true. Many drug and vaccine approvals in the past have been done before the trial has run its full course. Many drug and vaccine trials have given the placebo group the real drug once safety and efficacy is clear - before the end of the trial. This is not new, and frankly I’m a little surprised to see such conspiracy theories on HN.

The quality of discourse here is so so low, disguising antivax stands as concerns for the speed of the vaccine approval while disregarding simple verifiable facts such that 98%[0] of the people on ICU are unvaccinated

[0] https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-941fc...

Post reply on HN